Forensic Evidence: Why Is Fingerprinting Important

One of the most important purposes of physical evidence is to establish the identity of a suspect or victim. Some of the most valuable clues at a crime scene are fingerprints. "Processing a crime scene" is a long, tedious process that involves focused documentation of the conditions at the scene and the collection of any physical evidence that could possibly shed light on what happened and point to who did it.

In July of 1999 the fingerprint was introduced into the IAFIS. The FBI had so many fingerprints on file that in order to convict someone it would take years for them to be able to match a fingerprint. This database created a way for it to be completed faster and more efficient. The data is taken first with directly indefinable characteristics (name, social security, address, telephone number, email, biometric identifiers, photography) and then entered in the with non-indefinable characteristics (gender, race, birthdate, license number) to create personal file. The database is maintained by the FBI to keep all of the fingerprints in line. But, many agencies (federal, state, local and foreign) can use the database on order to make sure a suspect isn't linked with any other crimes and to identify the

For over a century fingerprints have been one of the most used tools of forensic science. Fingerprints have been used to identify criminals of small crimes

The use of fingerprinting as a means of identification was born out of the need of law enforcement officials to have permanent records that could determine if a convict had been previously arrested or imprisoned. Before the advent of fingerprinting, law enforcement used a number of different methods to try to accomplish this. Ancient civilizations would tattoo or physically maim prisoners. In more recent times, daguerreotyping (that is, photographing) was used, but proved to be less than reliable, because people had the ability to dramatically alter their appearance (Skopitz). As a result, this method too, became obsolete with the discovery of fingerprinting, an absolutely infallible

On the morning of May 6, 2004 Attorney Brandon Mayfield was arrested by the FBI at his office in Portland Oregon for being suspected of involvement in the “March 11, 2004 bombings of four commuter trains in Madrid, Spain that killed 191 people and injured over 2,000 others” due to a fingerprint found on a plastic bag (Sherrer). Fingerprint analysis “has been used to identify criminals for more than one hundred years. The process begins with a deposited, or ‘latent,’ print found at the scene of the crime” (“Fingerprint Analysis”). If the print is detailed enough, fingerprint analysts can visually compare the print from the crime scene to the fingerprints of a suspect. They compare “qualities such as the general shape of the prints, the shape and depth of the ridges in the print, and the length of each ridge” (“Fingerprint Analysis”). It has been said time and time again that no two people’s fingerprints are exactly alike, and that if the latent print and the suspect’s print match, the print must be theirs. This assertion, however, “is not based on any studies, research, or analysis. In other words, there is no scientific basis for the belief that fingerprints are unique to each person” (“Fingerprint Analysis”). The main problem with fingerprint analysis, as with bite mark analysis, is its subjectivity. Instead of “relying on tested scientific methods, the process is mostly based on the subjective beliefs of the analyst” (“Fingerprint Analysis”). This basically means that “because of the lack of validity of the testing and retesting process” and the “overall subjectivity of the process indicates that the analyst is not truly absolutely certain of anything – except the fact that he or she truly believes a match” (“Fingerprint Analysis”). In Brandon Mayfield’s case, the print in question “had been positively identified as Mayfield’s by three highly qualified

Fingerprints are impressions left by ridges that press against things and leave a mark. They’re formed in the basal layer of skin while in the womb. The three fundamental principles of fingerprints are: no two fingerprints are the same, a fingerprint will remain the same for a lifetime, and there are general ridge patterns found in fingerprints that allow them to be systematically classified. Arches, whorls, and loops are the three basic fingerprint patterns. There also four subgroups which are plain, central pocket, double/double loop, and accidental. A minutiae, or ridge characteristic, are characteristics within a fingerprint that must make up for identification. Some examples of individual ridge characteristics would be bifurcation, short ridge, dot, etc. With the use of fingerprints, many individuals have been identified in criminal investigations.

DNA Fingerprinting, also known as DNA Profiling, is a method used to identify a person using DNA patterns that are specific to him/her. 99.9% of DNA is identical in every human being, but .01% is enough to distinguish between people. It is most commonly used in criminal cases to link a criminal to his/her crime scene, but is also used for paternity/maternity tests, and immigration records. Usually a skin, hair, or body fluid sample is collected from a crime scene or criminal or test candidate, then DNA is extracted and cut using enzymes that recognize patterns in DNA and run through a gel by an electric current in a process called electrophoresis (Annely).

A new and rapidly advancing technology of DNA fingerprinting is not all the title entitles it to be. Many individuals would assume that DNA fingerprinting is the situation in which criminals or convicted individuals have their fingerprints recorded to keep them on file. However, this is not the case. DNA fingerprinting is when DNA evidence is taken from a person and matched to the DNA found on the crime scene or other suspected location. DNA fingerprinting doesn’t concern actual fingerprinting at all. In fact,

The introduction of the modern use of fingerprinting all started in 1984, when a British geneticist named Alec Jeffreys came across new methods for DNA fingerprinting (Jones, 2012). Since his discovery, this technique has been used successfully to identify perpetrators of crimes. For more than a century in fact, fingerprints have been used as identification tools by law enforcement. Known as “friction ridge analysis,” (Jones, 2012), this forensic method comprises of examiners comparing details of an unknown print against known prints. These details are analyzed

All over the world and as far as many people can remember, fingerprints have been used as a symbol of truth and justice in the forensics domain. The art of fingerprinting has been seen as a closure to many major crimes that have put many people in prison. However, in his article “Do Fingerprints Lie?” Michael Specter examines that fingerprinting has given rise to many questions as of the late 20th century. Fingerprints have been taken for granted, almost like money, which in this century, people believe is the best item to be handed to us. People tend to take what they hear, and just go with it without research or background knowledge. This practice has not been challenged as many concepts should. Specter brings in a solid argument with a lot of knowledge to support his claims and factual evidence to set his article with high credibility. While Specter builds a strong argument, he fails to consider how fingerprints have improved the forensic process.

From the early days, with little literary reference material, to the current day, with substantially more, but still insufficient formation, the science of fingerprint identification has managed to maintain its credibility and usefulness. Although, academic institutions have yet to recognize the field as an applied science and include it in the curricula, which would provide directed research and literary reference, in libraries. Without this academic recognition, progress in the field of fingerprint is destined to be sluggish. Description of fingerprint identification as a forensic science’ or an ~app1ied science’ in no way implies that is not a reliable science.

When examining impression and pattern evidence researchers can test the differences in many types of shoe marks. They can look at tread wear, nicks, and cuts. No two shoes are the same because people walk different ways and different places so each shoe mark will be different with maybe only a few similarities. Finger prints are another type of evidence. Fingerprints can help link a suspect to a

The automated Fingerprint Identification System is also known as the AFIS within the law enforcement division (FBI, 2010). This system is an important element in the criminal justice system as some of its features encompass the storing of data, encoding, and fingerprint and facial comparison through graphics and other techniques. Law officials many centuries ago in the pursuit of positively identifying someone suspected of guilt have long used fingerprints techniques. Fingerprinting is also used in branches of our government, and in the Pentagon, the authentication method of fingerprints is used permit access to specified zones inside the building. Fingerprints are an effective and very precise method of identification purposes that does not pose

“Fingerprint recognition is one of the divorce inference using the impressions made by the minute ridge formations or patterns found on the fingertips. No two people have exactly the same arrangement of the ridge patterns, and the remaining patterns of any one individual unchanged. Fingerprints infallible provide a means of personal identification. Other personal characteristics may change, but not fingerprints”. (1)

Fingerprinting is used for many things, such as a robbery, or at a crime scene. Fingerprints were first discovered in 1870 by Alphonse Bertillon, who was a French anthropologist. In 1892, Juan Vucetich had made the first criminal report using a fingerprint. In 1905 America used fingerprints for identification. When America started using fingerprints for identification they had to match the fingerprints manually when needed. When technology was able to enter fingerprints, and match them with anonymous ones, it helped identification immensely.