3 ms·

>that while latent fingerprint examiners can successfully rule out most of the population from being the source of a latent fingerprint based on observed featur

>that while latent fingerprint examiners can successfully rule out most of the population from being the source of a latent fingerprint based on observed features, insufficient data exist to determine how fingerprint features really are unique >>This makes it scientifically baseless to claim that an analysis has enabled examiners to narrow the pool of sources to a single person. While it doesn't narrow it down to a *single person, Fingerprints are still evidence. The litmus is to convince a jury of your peers.

zaroth 9y ago
Ask the average jurist, “we found the suspect’s fingerprints at the scene, is it possible the suspect wasn’t there?” the answer 12/12 times will be no. It’s even worse with DNA which could have been transferred.
- jmkb 9y ago
  > “we found the suspect’s fingerprints at the scene, is it possible the suspect wasn’t there?” This is a perfect example of "begging the question"! Hopefully we can ammend the question with "we found a fingerprint at the scene that matches the suspect" and get that number down to 11/12.
- gamblor956 9y ago
  Ask the average jurist, “we found the suspect’s fingerprints at the scene, is it possible the suspect wasn’t there?” the answer 12/12 times will be no. A jurist is lawyer or otherwise an expert of law. You'd most likely get a panel of 10-12/12 jurists agreeing that it's possible the suspect wasn't there at the time the crime was committed. You'd probably get a different answer if you asked a juror, but you still wouldn't get 12/12. Jurors are familiar with the concept of time. It's not even to prove that the suspect was there at all (especially if they have an explanation for why they were at the scene of the crime), the prosecution must establish they were specifically there at the time of the crime.

3 ms·

>that while latent fingerprint examiners can successfully rule out most of the population from being the source of a latent fingerprint based on observed featur

by supercanuck 9y ago

zaroth 9y ago
Ask the average jurist, “we found the suspect’s fingerprints at the scene, is it possible the suspect wasn’t there?” the answer 12/12 times will be no. It’s even worse with DNA which could have been transferred.
- jmkb 9y ago
  > “we found the suspect’s fingerprints at the scene, is it possible the suspect wasn’t there?” This is a perfect example of "begging the question"! Hopefully we can ammend the question with "we found a fingerprint at the scene that matches the suspect" and get that number down to 11/12.
- gamblor956 9y ago
  Ask the average jurist, “we found the suspect’s fingerprints at the scene, is it possible the suspect wasn’t there?” the answer 12/12 times will be no. A jurist is lawyer or otherwise an expert of law. You'd most likely get a panel of 10-12/12 jurists agreeing that it's possible the suspect wasn't there at the time the crime was committed. You'd probably get a different answer if you asked a juror, but you still wouldn't get 12/12. Jurors are familiar with the concept of time. It's not even to prove that the suspect was there at all (especially if they have an explanation for why they were at the scene of the crime), the prosecution must establish they were specifically there at the time of the crime.